- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
“Trump will be naming a conservative female to the SCOTUS very soon.“
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:46 am
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:46 am
Saw this in a post about RBG’s health. It was a derail in that thread, so I brought it here.
Personally, I hope that Trump picks another name off the Heritage/Federalist list, but that it is NOT a woman.
I have no problem at all with female SCOTUS Justices, but I DO dislike the notion that any given seat is somehow reserved for a member of a given demographic group.
When Sotomayor retires, are we required to replace her with a Latina? When Kagan retires, must her replacement be a Jewish woman?
Clarence Thomas is a solid Justice, but it would be disingenuous to assert that he was selected for any reason other than the fact that he was replacing Thurgood Marshall.
I was impressed when Bush-43 resisted the crowd noise insisting that he simply MUST replace O’Connor with another woman. Trump is enough of a maverick that I think he can do the same. But will he?
Personally, I hope that Trump picks another name off the Heritage/Federalist list, but that it is NOT a woman.
I have no problem at all with female SCOTUS Justices, but I DO dislike the notion that any given seat is somehow reserved for a member of a given demographic group.
When Sotomayor retires, are we required to replace her with a Latina? When Kagan retires, must her replacement be a Jewish woman?
Clarence Thomas is a solid Justice, but it would be disingenuous to assert that he was selected for any reason other than the fact that he was replacing Thurgood Marshall.
I was impressed when Bush-43 resisted the crowd noise insisting that he simply MUST replace O’Connor with another woman. Trump is enough of a maverick that I think he can do the same. But will he?
36
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:48 am to AggieHank86
I'm ok with a female SCOTUS pick as long as she listens to her right wing husband.
This post was edited on 4/23/19 at 9:49 am
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:49 am to AggieHank86
I agree but we must admit that, given the confirmation process and the inherent politics involved in said process, that one might consider these things when choosing a candidate or nominee.
That’s just life.
That’s just life.
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:51 am to AggieHank86
I agree but it's possible ACB could be the replacement for Thomas or Breyer. RBG seems invincible at this point.
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:53 am to AggieHank86
I think the difficulty of confirming a sane justice to replace that raving lunatic Ginsburg is real, and the nominee has to have some characteristics that can protect them from the media/dnc slander fabrication machine.
To some degree nominating a woman does that.
Also, if the aim is to target roe v wade, having a woman as the swing vote makes the progressives look even more nuts (I know hard to believe)
To some degree nominating a woman does that.
Also, if the aim is to target roe v wade, having a woman as the swing vote makes the progressives look even more nuts (I know hard to believe)
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:53 am to AggieHank86
In a perfect world, you simply pick the best candidate. Period.
In today's clown world, the genitals and skin-melanin-content matter just as much as the experience and demonstrated competence.
By the way, you can thank the left and the Democrat party entirely for that little nugget of ridiculous truth.
In today's clown world, the genitals and skin-melanin-content matter just as much as the experience and demonstrated competence.
By the way, you can thank the left and the Democrat party entirely for that little nugget of ridiculous truth.
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:53 am to AggieHank86
No idea why this post is getting downvotes.
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:56 am to AggieHank86
Good post. Who are you and what have you done with Hank? 
J/K
J/K
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:57 am to TigerCoon
But ACB might just be the most conservative choice on the list. I want her on the court for that reason, not because she is a woman.
This post was edited on 4/23/19 at 9:58 am
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:59 am to TigerCoon
quote:
No idea why this post is getting downvotes.
Because people see Hanks Aggie ring avatar and assume he's being is his usual self aggrandizing contrarian "centrist" self. In fact, he's occasionally an alright guy so you actually have to read the post before smacking the down vote button.
Posted on 4/23/19 at 9:59 am to AggieHank86
quote:
“Trump will be naming a conservative female to the SCOTUS very soon.“
Amy Coney Barrett might be one of the most beautiful jurists to ever exist on this planet and I will be honored if Daddy appoints her to SCOTUS to succeed Ginsburg or Thomas/Breyer, hopefully with Graham as Judiciary Chair, he'll shut down the Left's Borking the moment they attempt to stir shite up
Posted on 4/23/19 at 10:02 am to AggieHank86
quote:
When Sotomayor retires, are we required to replace her with a Latina? When Kagan retires, must her replacement be a Jewish woman?
No. Just don't replace them with two more ideological idiots.
Posted on 4/23/19 at 10:03 am to AggieHank86
I like Trump picking Amy Barrett to replace RBG, because it's a bit of an extra "frick you" to the libs.
Posted on 4/23/19 at 10:04 am to AggieHank86
I’m good with a conservative woman if she’s pro-life
Posted on 4/23/19 at 10:04 am to AggieHank86
just to mask that you would sky scream when Amy Coney Barrett and her "dogma' is appointed. Dismissing RBG's 'dogma' because she wouldn't allow others to speak about it. The Ginsburg rule is not special just for radical leftists. We shall have the Coney Barret Rule; that DiFi can't attack her personal religion or the amount of children she has.This post was edited on 4/23/19 at 10:05 am
Posted on 4/23/19 at 10:06 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Personally, I hope that Trump picks another name off the Heritage/Federalist list, but that it is NOT a woman.
As always, I'm just hoping for the best person for the job. Not biased against either sex.
I do think a qualified female candidate would be advantageous on multiple fronts, and would be formidable in the ineluctable PR firestorm Dems will create around such a selection.
Posted on 4/23/19 at 10:06 am to AggieHank86
quote:
I have no problem at all with female SCOTUS Justices, but I DO dislike the notion that any given seat is somehow reserved for a member of a given demographic group.
quote:
AggieHank86
I agree with you on almost nothing, because you're almost always wrong. But, you hit the nail on the head on this one. In fact, I'll go a step further. To me, it's insane that all the Justices are either Jewish or Catholic. Did that just happen randomly seems very strange to me that not one Justice out of a total of 9 is Protestant.
That being said, I will now seemingly contradict myself. If a Justice is stepping down soon, it's obviously Ruth Bader Ginsburg. I want Amy Barrett to replace her. Barrett is both female AND another Catholic, but she's the PERSON I want taking that spot.
But at some point, could President Trump please nominate a conservative PROTESTANT for the Supreme Court?
This post was edited on 4/23/19 at 10:07 am
Posted on 4/23/19 at 10:06 am to AggieHank86
I'm good with the most qualified no matter what.
Posted on 4/23/19 at 10:06 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Personally, I hope that Trump picks another name off the Heritage/Federalist list, but that it is NOT a woman.
quote:
But I DO dislike the notion that any given seat is somehow reserved for a member of a given demographic group.
You are contradicting yourself. You are saying the her spot should be reserved for a given demographic group that is all but women. If you want to be consistent, you'd say he'd pick the best person for that spot, regardless of race, gender, sexuality, etc.
This post was edited on 4/23/19 at 10:08 am
Posted on 4/23/19 at 10:08 am to CptRusty
Yeah, I get it. I don't agree with Hank all the time, but he's not a shill. He's just preachy.
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News